One of the highly controversial issues relates to fixed punishment which certain extent people support adequate and same beating regardless of the scandal and factors. Although the rest of people emphasize the roles of several factors such as motivation, condition as the reason of misdeed should be investigated and reflected verdict. In this essay sheds light on both webs arguments and conclude.
Above all, some judiciary system manages people’s wrongdoing through fixed abuse. They make claims that this method outweigh its disadvantages. Initially, fixed punishment indicates exemplary penalties and in the result, society incline to avoid breaking rules or doing heinous crime. Secondly, it is a undeniable fact crime and any violent action is estimated negative events by society regardless of motivation and condition of offending. Additionally, pre-determined discipline may aid judiciary organization as deterring legislative step. It is considered that kind of system is able to dwindle crime rate and intensity of punishment.
More likely in some occasions person might reflect and involves to offend lawlessness. It is an essential responsibility of advocates to take considering whether a person did it deliberately or accidentally, in other word in order to protect himself/ herself. This could be justice if we differ offender who killed someone deliberately, for example to rub or burger people or killed somebody accidentally when he or she was under attack. The second group of people thinks about fixed beating may deteriorate our society. Due to swift and quick verdict may cause unfair penal decision. Overall variations among criminals and offenders should be investigated and it may help the judiciary process too.
Regarding me there is a subtle moment between two options. I guess we could not give a “zero unfair verdict”. Hence we have to be better off make balance and find an intermediary position without any biased. Moreover government should strong education and other relates an area to decline lawlessness’s rate.
In conclusion, two points of view have own and sound merits. The legislative system ought to highlight and use both of them split by conditions and occasions.
One of the
highly
controversial issues relates to
fixed
punishment which certain extent
people
support adequate and same beating regardless of the scandal and factors. Although the rest of
people
emphasize the roles of several factors such as motivation, condition as the reason of misdeed should
be investigated
and reflected verdict. In this essay sheds light on both webs arguments and conclude.
Above all
,
some
judiciary system manages
people’s
wrongdoing through
fixed
abuse. They
make
claims that this method outweigh its disadvantages.
Initially
,
fixed
punishment indicates exemplary penalties and in the result, society incline to avoid breaking
rules
or doing heinous crime.
Secondly
, it is
a
undeniable fact crime and any violent action
is estimated
negative
events
by society regardless of motivation and condition of offending.
Additionally
,
pre-determined
discipline may aid judiciary organization as deterring legislative step. It
is considered
that kind of system is able to dwindle crime rate and intensity of punishment.
More likely in
some
occasions
person might reflect and involves to offend lawlessness. It is an essential responsibility of advocates to take considering whether a person did it
deliberately
or
accidentally
, in other word in order to protect himself/ herself. This could be justice if we differ offender who killed someone
deliberately
,
for example
to rub or burger
people
or killed somebody
accidentally
when he or she was under attack. The second group of
people
thinks
about
fixed
beating may deteriorate our society. Due to swift and quick verdict may cause unfair penal decision.
Overall
variations among criminals and offenders should
be investigated
and it may
help
the judiciary process too.
Regarding me there is a subtle moment between two options. I guess we could not give a “zero unfair verdict”.
Hence
we
have to
be better off
make
balance and find an intermediary position without any biased.
Moreover
government
should strong education and other relates an area to decline lawlessness’s rate.
In conclusion
, two points of view have
own
and sound merits. The legislative system ought to highlight and
use
both of them split by conditions and occasions.